Posted on

Earth and the Scheme of Things

“When we contemplate the whole globe, flying through space with other stars singing and shining, the whole universe appears as…

You must be logged in to view this content.

Posted on

Orthodox Science on Trial

Are we witnessing the fall of a mighty empire? There is plenty of support for that notion in this group…

You must be logged in to view this content.

Posted on

Lost City of the Arctic

There is no more desolate or inhabitable location on our planet that found above the Arctic Circle. Ferocious temperatures lashed by blasting windstorms make it a most difficult area for life to get a foothold. This ultimately remote and forbidden polar region would be the last place anyone would expect to discover evidence for an ancient civilization. Yet, the distinguished Natural History magazine reported, “We have now found an Arctic metropolis many times larger than anything previously thought possible in this part of the world and inhabited by people whose material culture differed markedly from that of the Eskimos, as we know them.”

With these words, F.G. Rainey announced the discovery of a mystery still to be explained. During summer 1938, he and another, university-trained archaeologist found tell-tale signs of an old settlement faintly outlined on the Alaskan permafrost, about 325 miles north of Nome, 130 miles north of the Arctic Circle. They assumed the site did not differ from other, small, primitive communities occupied by local fishing peoples, the direct ancestors of Alaska’s Eskimos, dating back no further than five centuries ago.

Returning in June 1940 to complete their excavations at Ipiutak—a term for “seal tusk” in the local, Yupik dialect—on the Point Hope peninsula, Rainey and Magnus Marks felt blessed by the unseasonably warm temperatures that allowed for greener grass and moss, against which the outlines of the sub-surface hamlet could be clearly discerned for the first time. But as the scientists followed its outlines, they could clearly distinguish features of an urban center greater than anything associated with ancestral Eskimos. Long boulevards of square foundations spread east and west along the shore of the Chukchi Sea.

“We became aware of the astonishing extent of the ruins,” Rainey told Natural History. He had Marks trace the figures of large, square structures regularly arranged in five main avenues and down shorter cross-blocks, where smaller foundations, suggestive of family domiciles, stood at right angles to the thoroughfares. Their finished survey identified more than 600 buildings, but incomplete test pits indicated at least another 200. The archaeological zone is less than a quarter-mile across and nearly one mile long, with an estimated original population of some 4,000 residents, larger by far than anything known to the Eskimos, who, in any case, never built such structures nor laid out the kind of urban planning apparent at the site. Moreover, in the 23 buildings excavated in 1940, nothing resembling anything similar to local native culture was found.

“One of the most striking features of the Ipiutak material,” Rainey stated, “is the elaborate and sophisticated carving and the beautiful workmanship, which would not be expected in a primitive, proto-Eskimo culture ancestral to the modern.” Another researcher, Rene Noorbergen, writes in his 1979 classic, Secrets of Lost Races, that the prehistoric inhabitants of Ipiutak “had a knowledge of mathematics and astronomy comparable to that of the ancient Maya.”

The absence of any large refuge deposits covering the buildings, which were not superimposed over older structures, showed that the town was simultaneously settled by its inhabitants and did not slowly develop over time. Every indication of the physical evidence demonstrated that Ipiutak was raised all at once and occupied by the same people that built it. As such, they seemed to have arrived en masse on the Chukchi coast already in possession of all their construction technologies and skills, which they applied to building their town the moment they arrived. Excavators of their cemetery found the remains of tall, slender-built individuals with strands of blond hair and Cro-Magnon-like skulls.

Clearly, they were not related to the shorter, squat, black-haired Eskimos. An artistic design preferred by the ancient inhabitants of Ipiutak was the spiral composed of two elements carved in the round. The motif appears nowhere else in the Arctic region, but is found on the other side of the Pacific Ocean among the aboriginal Caucasoid Ainu of Japan, renowned for their amber-colored eyes, and Amur River tribes in northeastern Asia. Thus, it would appear that northern Alaska’s ancient metropolis was imported by the Jomon-jin people, the globetrotting megalith-builders, as they were known in prehistoric Japan.

The great distances separating use of the spiral symbol common to such diverse peoples suggests to some that they were directly descended from the older civilization of Mu, lost beneath the Pacific Ocean in a terrible natural catastrophe, 12,000 years ago. Even more than the anomalous appearance of a sophisticated society flourishing in an area otherwise entirely known for its small bands of Eskimo hunters trying to scratch out an existence, the profound age of the discovery is especially upsetting to mainstream understanding of prehistory. Warm conditions required for human habitation did not exist at Point Hope for the last 30,000 years, a time when man supposedly created nothing like a city. Archaeologists guess that northern Alaska must have been somehow missed by the glaciers that carved up the rest of North America, resulting in an ice-free, temperate climate. Theirs is speculation only, and actually contrary to what geologists know about the last ice age.

“However,” explorer David Hatcher Childress writes, “it is difficult to see how a large ice cap from an ice age would leave a huge swath of semitropical land extending into the unaccountably ice-free Arctic seas adjacent to the pole. Add to this the large population now said to be exampled on these shores over 10,000 years ago, and we have a historical puzzle that would make any geologist, archaeologist, or historian clench his teeth.”

It seems clear, then, that the mile-long habitation site at Ipiutak had to have been built prior to the last glaciation, thus suggesting a civilized antiquity far beyond our expectations or accepted chronologies. At what remote period, then, could Ipiutak have possibly been built? Rainey found the Point Hope town “buried beneath so much sand from the beach” that it must have flourished many thousands of years ago. Ipiutak could only have been inhabited when warmer conditions permitted its higher culture to survive and prosper there.

Around 14,000 BP, a sudden warm phase interrupted the last glacial epoch for another 3,200 or 2,500 years, before the sudden return of cold temperatures with the Younger Dryas stadial ( Following this “Big Freeze,” 1,300 years later, the Arctic settled own to its present climate, referred to as the Holocene. While the onset of Japan’s Jomon culture closely coincides with the 14,000-year-old warm phase, paleo-climatologists are doubtful that northern Alaska benefited much or was even affected during this period.

According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, “The last time that scientists can say confidently that the Arctic was free of summertime ice was 125,000 years ago, during the height of the last major interglacial period, known as the Eemian. Temperatures in the Arctic were warmer than now and sea level was also four to six meters (13 to 20 feet) higher than it is today, because the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets had partly melted.”

If Jomon-jin people settling along the Point Hope peninsula between 14,000 to 12,800 years ago appears unlikely, their arrival 125,000 years ago seems utterly impossible. Yet, how are we to account for the Ipiutak ruins “buried beneath so much sand from the beach,” a deposition giving every indication of extreme antiquity? Moreover, the Younger Dryas stadial ( Stadial) and Holocene that followed the warm phase brought sea levels down from the archaeological zone on the Chukchi Sea coast by as much as 20 feet. The original dry-land site was once covered by water that later retreated, a process that fits the Eemian Period, not the Younger Dryas.

Current evolutionary theory states that homo sapiens migrating out of Africa 125,000 years ago only got as far as the Near East ( Humans did not reach Alaska until more than one hundred five thousand years later by following herds of bison across the Bering Land Bridge from Siberia and wandered into the American Southwest no earlier than 11,000 BCE.

“Located in the Arctic Circle,” Dr. Gunnar Thompson explains, “this strait was an effective barrier to migration for most of antiquity. However, the barrier is not a permanent geological feature. During cyclical temperature extremes called ‘Ice Ages,’ the sea level drops by hundreds of feet, and the bottom of the Bering Strait lies exposed. At maximum glaciation, the sea level can drop nearly 400 feet… When this happens, retreating seas expose enormous areas of the continental shelf, including a land-bridge of habitable territory between Siberia and Alaska. Geographers call this transcontinental passageway, ‘Beringia’.”

For the sake of comparison, Europe was dominated by Neanderthals 50,000 years ago, and Cro-Magnon, or Modern Man, would not appear for another 10,000 years. Yet, the same time frame was cited during 1969 by Tulsa World (Oklahoma), which reported how “amino-acid dating of a human skull found in California indicates human habitation of North America 50,000 years ago.”

Doubling this profound antiquity to parallel the founding fathers of Alaska’s Ipiutak is surprisingly supported by a variety of contemporaneous finds. At the northern end of Lake Huron and Georgian Bay, Ontario, the National Museum of Canada’s T.E. Lee labored at an archaeological precinct known as Sheguiandah, on Manitoulin, the world’s largest freshwater island. Between 1951 and 1955, he dug up finely made stone tools and worked fragments of quartzite at strata consistent with 100,000 BP.

Forty years after Lee’s discovery, chipped, quartzite cobbles were found at another Canadian dig near Calgary. “It is undeniable that these cobbles look artificially worked,” observed the American physicist and great compiler of anomalous scientific information, William R. Corliss (1926–2011). “In fact, they closely resemble the human-made ‘choppers’ from Early Paleolithic sites in Asia and Europe. The Alberta ‘tools’ could be over 100,000 years old, completely upsetting the accepted timetable for human activity in North America.”

At California’s Mission Ridge site, in the San Diego River Valley, its principal investigator, B. Reeves from the University of Calgary, has retrieved dozens of scrapers, choppers, and worked flakes his stratigraphic analysis dated to 120,000 years BP, making them more closely contemporaneous with Ipiutak’s proposed time scale.

The cause for this apparent proliferation of Stone Age discoveries in North America may have been the onset of the Abbassia Pluvial. This was an extended wet and rainy period that lasted until circa 90,000 years ago. The North African Desert bloomed with abundant vegetation fed by lakes, swamps, and river systems, nourishing wildlife now associated with grasslands and woodlands south of the Sahara. These lush conditions also triggered a surge in human cultural development that shifted Lower Paleolithic society ( into a more sophisticated Middle Paleolithic era (http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Middle_Paleolithic), as reflected in surviving examples of more advanced stone-tool workmanship. Paleo-anthropologists believe that the first emigration of modern Homo sapiens out of Africa and into the outside world was sparked by the Abbassia Pluvial (, although they deny any human migrations entered America during this period.

How, then, can we explain the origins and antiquity of Ipiutak? Answers may lie in the Old Norse myth of human beginnings, when Abdumla, a cosmic cow, licked away the ice of a glacier to form the first man and woman. The Greeks, too, had a myth of Hyperboria, a place north of Oceanus, near the North Pole, strangely known for its perpetual springtime. The Hyperborean maidens were a select group of priestesses, who traveled from their polar homeland to sacred Delos, at the precise center of the Aegean Sea—hence, the island’s title as “Navel of the World”—where they came to perform mystical rites honoring the birth of Apollo, the sun-god. Their tombs are still pointed out among the classical ruins by tour guides at Delos.

This is not to suggest that the permafrost remains at Ipiutak are those of ancient Hyperboria. They do, however, indicate that a civilization unlike anything produced by the Eskimo did indeed thrive in the Arctic tens of thousands of years ago. And it may have been a commercial center, given some of the ritual objects excavated. Among the outstanding examples are repeated instances of the iconic spiral, generally interpreted in Western European Neolithic cultures, such as Ireland’s New Grange, to signify the soul’s journey through time—from birth to death and rebirth, just as the infant leaves its mother’s womb in a spiral motion.

Another material symbol found at Ipiutak was a human skull with ivory nose plugs and an ivory cover over the mouth. The orbital cavities were inserted with ivory carvings resembling eyes inlaid with polished stone pupils, lending the skull a lifelike appearance. The modified skull underscores its companion spiral carvings as a symbol of rebirth. Installing open eyes, signifying life, into a death’s head (its breath stopped at nostrils and mouth), implies concepts of an afterlife not native to the Arctic.

We may infer from these and similar artifacts that the ancient residents of Ipiutak were practitioners of a mystery cult, whose rituals emphasized the eternal conquest by the soul over recurring episodes of death. As more excavations succeed in making new discoveries at the lost city of the Arctic, a ceremonial center as spiritually resonant as it is profoundly ancient may arise to challenge conventional understanding of our civilized origins.

Alternative Archeology

May/June2017 – #123

Posted on

Beating the Oxford Runaround to the Dawn Stones

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries many archaeologists and geologists in Europe were investigating crude stone tools they…

You must be logged in to view this content.

Posted on

Australian Americans?

Over the last decade, all manner of unexpected archaeological discoveries have led to many experts questioning much of what was assumed to be fact. A large variety of unexpected findings have called into question many elemental assumptions held about the past. These include the discovery of little “hobbits” on Flores Island; Siberian hominids with mtDNA connections to the people of Papua New Guinea (PNG); and the purity of our distinct genetic Homo sapiens code being compromised by a Neanderthal component of 4%.

Professor Clive Gamble of Southampton University succinctly summarized the current impasse and polarization this has caused, when declaring we have to construct “a completely new map of the world and how we peopled it.” Granted, our response to Gamble’s call may seem radical; however, these discoveries, found not only in America but throughout the entire Indo-Pacific Region, all point to the same ancient southern location as the key to the new cartography.

After extensive consultation and research, we are of the opinion that at some time in the distant past, no less than 50,000 years ago and possibly much earlier, Original men and women set sail from Australia and began exploring foreign lands. They were the bearers of new insights and options, and bequeathed humanity their genes and the cornerstones of a genuinely civilized civilization: religion, culture, gender equality, art, sailing, democracy, astronomy, and surgery.


The Australian Americans

The recent discoveries of “hundreds of skeletal remains” in America that “look like Australian Aborigines” indicate that early immigrations were more likely from Australia than to it. In the October/November 2011 edition of Cosmos, Jacqui Hayes presented a compelling morphological case in support of an Australian Original presence in America. According to Hayes, Original settlement of the Americas began at an indeterminate time before the second migration of people “with distinctive Mongoloid features,” and that “startling new finds suggest Australia’s first people made it all the way to South America more than 11,000 years ago.” This leaves an unresolved question. How far back did these original settlements span? Were there other locations settled? If, indeed, Hayes is right, in that Australian Original people were the first to enter America, any artifact or indication of human activity dated as more than 11,000 years old must be related to people bearing Australian Original genes.

The impossibility of any ancient African migration to America having occurred was confirmed through the examination of Original bones that established the presence of distinctive antigens. “Arnaiz-Vilena and his team looked at the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) system, which is a group of proteins on the surface of human immune cells. The HLAs are what doctors test for to determine whether one person’s tissues are compatible for organ or bone transplants. HLA is a nuclear marker giving an even genealogy and genetic history for both sexes—the best test showing that HLA is a good genetic marker for studying population relatedness in that it usually correlates with geography.”

As expected, the first nominee was Australian, but just as importantly the comparative results bore witness to one genetic type which was notably missing; it seems the Africans forgot to sign on for this distinctive genetic marker. “So what did they find? Unique signatures only found in Australian Aborigines, Pacific Islanders, and peoples in Asia, and even in Europe.” The nonappearance of African HLA is yet another inconvenient piece of evidence for anyone wishing to hold onto the theory that Eve was an African.

When factoring in these recent additions to the Australian Original/American time line, dates just exceeding the maximum Clovis (Mongoloid) entry date are certainly inconvenient to established theory, but they do not demand tearing out pages from standard text books… yet. There is a substantial amount of corroborating evidence of Original presence in the Americas during the 10,000 years before the second migration from Asia began. It can be found at Tlapacoya, 21,700–25,000 years before present (BP), Los Toldos Cave, Patagonia, 14,000–15,000 BP, Meadowbank Rockshelter 19,000 BP (southwest Pennsylvania), Tibito 14,400 BP (Colombia), Walker 15,000 BP (Minnesota), and Mud Lake 13,450 BP (Wisconsin).

But it doesn’t stop there. Professor Silvia Gonzalez, who is a leading advocate of the Out-of-Australia Theory (OAusT), was “quite staggered” by the dates obtained when analyzing the footprints found in a layer of volcanic ash at Lake Valsequillo (Mexico). “A variety of prints (human and animal) captured in this layer of rock were dated using optically stimulated luminescence (O.S.L.).” She found, much to her understandable surprise, that 40,000 years was established as the “last time that these sediments were lit by the sun’s rays or the last time that the material was heated.” Gonzalez is adamant that these are Australian Original footprints and that they were left by people who reached America by boat by “island hopping” around the Pacific Basin.

Such a date, 40,000 years, pushes the boundaries and affirms the reality of an extensive Original tenure in the Americas. Nor is this an isolated bit of evidence. The corroborative timing of Albert Goodyear’s site cannot be a coincidence, and the considerable distance between locations strengthens its significance. “Goodyear had been working at an archaeological site on the Savannah river, near Topper. It was agreed all the available evidence from the Clovis site had been gathered and their work was complete . . . He kept digging for another four meters before an assortment of stone tools, along with a hearth, were unearthed. A small piece of charcoal was then analyzed by counting the residual Carbon 14, and a date of no less than 37,000 years was deemed appropriate.”

Uncomfortable as these dates are for anyone clinging to traditional theories in relation to when ancient Australian Originals first came to America, for such individuals it gets worse. Not far from the Lake Valsequillo footprints Gonzalez investigated, is another site that was deliberately ignored for close to thirty years after Cynthia Irwin-Williams conducted a comprehensive investigation. The dates are so sensational and numerous, and so obviously associated with objects made by Homo sapiens, the archaeologists downed their tools and clipboards and vowed never to return. The dates returned by a variety of sound geological analyses were far too ancient, not only for a presence in the Americas but well outside the assumed period when Homo sapiens first appeared on earth! To some extent the issue isn’t just a matter of whether these numbers are feasible, it is more a case of open antagonism between two competing branches of science.

Christopher Hardaker, author of The First American, created a fictional conversation between the two competing parties which graphically highlights how much the argument over which group of academics have the right to exclusively claim victory has blinded the combatants.

ARCHAEOLOGIST: You are asking us to believe that the sophisticated art and technology of the Upper Paleolithic was actually invented over 200,000 years ago in Central Mexico by Homo erectus? Ridiculous.

GEOLOGIST: You are asking us to believe that Science is off by a magnitude of 10? Ridiculous!

Often the result of cutting-edge technology, the chemical analysis and computations came from extremely reputable institutions and individuals. Some of the techniques performed upon the layer of volcanic ash and debris deposited above the artifacts and footprints which delivered the offending dates include Uranium Series Dating (200,000 years); Zircon Fission Track (170,000–640,000 years); mineral solutions (200,000 years); Diatom analysis (80,000 years); U-Th/He (200,000 years); tephrahydration (250,000 years); magnetic shifts in rocks (790,000 years); and argon argon (1,300,000 years). The facts, and large figures, demand a response. What if just one date is actually right? Does that mean Homo sapiens were, as Christopher Hardaker claims, responsible for “600,000 year old art?”

As to whether Gonzalez’ “island hopping” route from Australia, up through Asia, Japan, Siberia, then America is plausible, it is often said a picture can act as a worthy substitute for quite a few words. German anthropologist, Dr. Hermann Klaatsch, took a photograph of a Japanese full-descent Ainu Elder in the late nineteenth century. The physical characteristics displayed in this photograph are strikingly similar to those of an Australian Aborigine, as are those of “a very well-preserved skeleton from Gua Gunung, Malaysia,” which was recently discovered and about which it was reported “[this] specimen is aged 10,200 BP and is said to be a late representative of a non-specialized morphology, similar to Australian Aborigines.”

The First Boat

For traces of a population “similar to Australian Aboriginals” to be present in Malaysia, Japan, America, or any other place, a boat is needed. The oft-proposed settlement of Australia from Africa by ramshackle raft, or through desperately clinging on to driftwood during storms, doesn’t measure up. This vessel must be able to withstand monsoons and weeks at sea. It must accommodate a crew of close to twenty adults so that the settlers in their new home can avoid inbreeding and successfully populate an uninhabited continent. Nowhere today is anyone going to discover the actual ancient wooden remains of such an ancient sophisticated “ocean-going” vessel. However, if there is no actual wreckage to be found, there is, nonetheless, other evidence of a seafaring tradition among the ancient Australians.

Graham Walsh was the widely recognized authority on the intriguing Bradshaw art of the Kimberley area… Within this area, he has discovered the oldest paintings of boats in the world, dated at a minimum age of 17,000 years, but with the strong possibility of being up to 50,000 years old… Walsh insisted that the” “high prow of the boat” is “unnecessary for boats used in calm, inland waters. The design suggests it was used on the open ocean.” Walsh was quite shocked by the function, antiquity, and most importantly, dimensions of these vessels: “they are massive boats, totally alien.” Moreover, not only was the sophistication and technology exhibited difficult for Walsh to assimilate, he still had to account for the reasons why there were “two paintings of ocean-going boats, one with 23 people on board, the other 29.”

These are ideal numbers for founding populations sailing towards distant lands. However, diagrams and specifications of themselves do not make a boat. To have a clever idea is a promising first step, but there are some practicalities to be addressed before an actual nautical expedition can be embarked upon. There are materials, tools, and navigation skills required which supposedly did not exist for at least another 20,000 years. Irrespective of what is assumed, the first tool needed to build a ship that can comfortably cater for thirty people is an axe. Wood in its prime, not the rotting logs that fall by themselves, is essential in manufacturing a vessel strong enough to sail across oceans.

It should come as no surprise that the oldest axe in the world, dated as 40,000 years old, was found at Huon Terrace P.N.G. (which was part of the Australian mainland until 8,000 years ago). Others discovered are also incredibly old, like the examples found in Jaowyn land, Northern Territory (35,500 years), at Sandy Creek, Queensland (32,000 years), and Malangangerr Northern Territory (23,000). All of these are at least 8,000 years older than the first axe found outside Australia, at Niah Cave, Sarawak, which is dated as 15,000 years old.

With axe at hand, plans on the wall, and overseas bookings made, there still remains one vital seafaring skill any journey beyond landfall demands: navigation. Hugh Cairns’s book, Dark Sparklers, is the first and only publication dedicated to the sharing of traditional Original astronomical knowledge. Cairns won the trust of Wardaman Elder, Bill Harnley, who spoke of his ancestral knowledge of the stars, “great black shapes” the movements and constellations in between, and of up “on top.” According to Cairns, there have been Original astronomers for “over 30,000 years.”

Not only the Pacific but the Indian Ocean was navigated by ancient Australians who brought many esoteric gifts, technologies, guidelines and, of course, their genes to distant continents. “Dr. Raghavendra Rao and researchers from the Indian-backed Anthropological Survey of India project found unique mutations were shared between modern-day Indians and Aborigines.” They “identified seven people from central Dravidian and Austro-Asiatic tribes who shared genetic traits only found in Aborigines.”

Much earlier linguistic studies of the Dravidian language had already identified a relationship between the two peoples. Dravidian “fishermen of the Madras coast use almost the same words for I, thou, he, we, and you as some Aboriginal tribes. Many other key words in the Dravidian dialects are identical to Tasmanian Aboriginal terms both in pronunciation and meaning.”

“It needs to be appreciated that Tasmanian culture and language is a relatively recent event, and the island is the outcome of the final thawing at the end of the last Ice Age when the seas covered the low plains between Victoria and Tasmania. Over the last 8,000 years this isolation has been instrumental in the development of a distinctive Tasmanian culture.” With a language that came into existence no earlier than 8,000 years ago forming a substantial part of the basic Dravidian vocabulary, this mtDNA connection strongly suggests the Australian Originals kept in contact with India for some considerable time. The cultural connection is further emphasized by the fact that “Australian canoes are constructed identically to those of the coastal Dravidian tribes of India, and wild tribes in the Deccan region of India are the only culture known to use the boomerang outside Australia.”

The oldest boomerang discovered in the world was found at Wyrie Swamp, South Australia, and is dated at 10,200 years. That the dingo is accepted to have been brought into Australia from somewhere in Asia about 6,000 years ago only strengthens the possibility of a history of extended Australo-Indian interaction being fact. It would appear that the Dravidians adopted the Australian boomerang to hunt with, chose their better designed canoes to assist in fishing and, as is often the case when two cultures first meet, shared technology, friendship, and genes.


The above is an edited excerpt from the new book by Steven and Evan Strong, Out of Australia, Aborigines, the Dreamtime, and the Dawn of the Human Race, published by Hampton Roads, presented here with the publisher’s permission.

Lost History

May/June2017 – #123

Posted on

Ancient ETs vs. Darwin

Who are we? How did we come to be upon the earth? It was once accepted as fact in the Western world that we came into being through a series of creative acts that took place over the course of just six days. In this particular narrative God placed the sun, moon, and stars in the sky and created the plants and animals; and then, on the sixth day, formed the first man and woman and placed them in a divine garden to live.

The belief that all life was fashioned by a benevolent creator deity, as portrayed in the Bible, remained unquestioned for millennia of Western history, yet in the mid nineteenth century the notion came under attack. Charles Darwin, in his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, introduced a theory that suggested that all life formed from a common ancestor and not through divine intervention.

While on a voyage to the Galapagos Islands, Darwin had studied indigenous wildlife. He noticed, as he traveled from island to island, distinct variations in animals of the same species. The animals, he observed, had transformed to meet the rigors of their specific, remote island homes. He speculated that the unique environment the animals lived in caused them to change until they had adapted to their new environment. He also concluded that these alterations took place naturally over vast periods of time.

With the publication of Darwin’s book, the modern Theory of Evolution was born, suggesting that organic life had arisen from inorganic compounds. The theory proposed that extremely early life forms, over the course of billions of years, experienced a series of genetic mutations. These slight variations caused organisms to alter their form until they developed into a variety of plant and animal species. Beneficial changes that aided survival, he conjectured, were preserved and then passed on to later generations. This supported the proliferation of the newly acquired advantageous trait—the so-called ‘survival of the fittest.’ The process came to be known as ‘natural selection.’

“Natural selection,” Darwin wrote, “acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap but must advance by short and sure, though slow, steps.” The small changes observed, he concluded, took place over extended periods, billions of years, in a slow and gradual process and ultimately resulted in entirely new organisms.

Darwin’s observations set off a debate that has been going on for over 150 years. Called the creation–evolution controversy, the creation vs. evolution debate, or the origins debate, a dispute between scientific and theological scholars about the origin of life quickly became heated. A schism quickly formed between the two groups. The once widely-held belief that God created us was challenged by a theory said to be “based in empirical scientific fact.” The science community denounced traditional views held by Christians as anti-science.

Today, individuals who hold to the belief that we were created supernaturally by God are called “Creationists.” The universe and all the life in it originated, they teach, “from specific acts of divine creation.” Creationists do not attempt to explain God, his motives nor his processes, but put their faith in the exact words that they find in the Bible. Advancements in science since Darwin have resulted in a number of competing models vying for leadership of the Creationist movement. Views include not only those who interpret the Bible literally but those of some whose ideas incorporate an extensive array of scientifically established facts.

The more literal group has been labeled by some as Young-Earth-Creationist. God created the earth in a process that lasted six days, they say, and that within the last ten thousand years. The exact date specified is based upon the so-called Ussher’s Chronology. Established by James Ussher in the seventeenth century, the Chronology was derived by adding the lifespan of early biblical characters and later biblical kings. The first day of creation, Ussher deduced, began at 6 p.m. on Saturday, October 22, 4004 BC.

At about the same time as Ussher’s pronouncement, what some now call the ‘age of science’ was dawning. Arguments based on what was said to be the archaeological and geological record would claim the earth was tens, perhaps even hundreds of millions of years old. Such evidence-based notions brought Ussher’s Chronology under strong criticism and would eventually lead to the adoption by some of an alternative creationism—what might be called “Old Earth creationism.”

Old Earth creationists believe that the earth could be as old as the Darwinists maintain. These believe that God played an active role in the creation of the universe, the earth and all life within it. They go on to say that God has performed countless acts of creation throughout history where he acted directly or as a guiding force behind his creation.

Progressive creationists, like Old Earth creationists, accept much of the standard scientific timetable for the age of the world. They also give credence to the role evolution plays in the development of life on the earth. They believe that God created each kind of organism, not as the result of evolution, but as a series of separate acts of creation. They also believe that micro-evolution took place. Micro-evolution involves the gradual accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties within a species. Progressive creationists contend that evolution accounts for variations within a species but not for the creation and formation of a new species itself.

As early archaeologists, excavating in the mid-to-late 19th century, began to unearth and catalog the bones of early man, the fossils discovered seemed to show evidence of advancement from simpler to more complex hominid forms. The exemplars were said to reveal a series of distinct beneficial changes that precipitated the advent of modern man—what would eventually be called the “ascent of man”. These changes, based upon their relative dating, occurred over extended periods. These finds appeared to support the precepts associated with the Darwinian view of evolution.

Researchers, however, were, and still are, unable to explain how theses drastic changes occurred. They have scrambled for years hoping to discover the “missing link,” a set of archaic human bones that would provide conclusive evidence of our transition from ape to man. Despite their best efforts, this smoking gun has yet to be found. The inability to produce a missing link has fueled the Creationist argument that the universe and all life in it originated from specific acts of creation and not from a slow and random process. Creationists argue that the variation seen in our genetic make-up only goes to prove the hand of God at work.

Think of it as you may, the creation story as portrayed in the Bible does offer something that should not be ignored. No matter where you look, regardless of which culture you look at on the planet, all of the stories of how we came into being bear much resemblance. They state that God created all life on earth, including humanity, period. While creationists do not look outside the Bible to support their claims, cultures around the world support the fundamental beliefs held by creationists.

Tales that recount the creation of man include variations such as making him out of clay or creating him out of the blood, bones or other genetic materials of a god. Many cultures share stories of the gods making more than one attempt at creating humanity.

The notion of multiple creations may also be found in the Bible. The Book of Genesis, as we explored earlier, tells of humanity being created in God’s image. “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:27) Then in the second chapter of Genesis the story of the creation of man is revisited. In this section, God creates Adam from the dust of the earth and breathes life into his nostrils. “Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7) The narrative then goes on to describe how Eve was formed from one of Adam’s ribs.

In Sumerian myths we learn that numerous attempts were made to fashion the perfect man. The goddess Ninmah made the six attempts, each with poor results. The fertility god Ea worked on the seventh. He did this by putting semen into a woman’s womb. Ultimately, the woman brought forth Umul. Umul was also afflicted with a number of physical disorders. In yet another trial, the god Nuntu mixed clay with the blood of a sacrificed god. She then had the Igigi spit upon the clay. It is unclear what the exact combination was that finally created a fully functional man, but the gods did eventually succeed.

The Mayan text, the Popol Vuh, informs us that the gods made three attempts to form humanity. The earth, once complete, was covered with trees and flowers. The gods decided that they should fashion guardians to watch over their creation and decided to create a new race of beings. The new beings would have the ability to speak and would be able to venerate their creators in the manner they desired. They began to mold clay into a form they had imagined—man. The first people quickly proved unsatisfactory as they kept falling apart. Their heads would not turn and their faces were lopsided. Since they were made of mud, they fell apart when they were exposed to water.

The gods, realizing their mistake, set about making yet another version. This time they used wood. The new beings could walk upright, but their creation seemed heartless and devoid of feelings. Its legs were not agile. It was not strong and it had problems with its digestive tract. The gods, frustrated with the outcome of their work, condemned their new creation to death, and a rain of ash wiped them out of existence.

The gods tried again to create the perfect being. In their third attempt, the gods decided to make four new beings out of ground corn. Their bodies were reinforced with reeds, which added strength. They also created an elixir that would prolong their lives. These new beings, to the god’s surprise, demonstrated intelligence and an understanding of the world around them.

World myth, in my view, does not recount stories of a slow and gradual process. What we find are multiple accounts of the gods “creating” humanity. These stories also reflect the concept that several different methodologies were used until the perfect man was formed. Is it possible that the earlier versions of man, Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis may actually be a record of these earlier versions of man as portrayed in myth?

Questions concerning the origin of humanity do not end there. A new theory into this mystery has presented itself over the last few decades. This theory postulates that an extraterrestrial presence inserted itself into the natural development of life on earth, including human evolution. Our ancestors, according to author and ancient alien proponent Erich von Däniken, saw the advanced technology of these other worldly visitors and took it to be a supernatural occurrence. In their awe and wonder, they acclaimed these celestial visitors as their gods.

Ancient Alien theorists, like von Däniken and Zecharia Sitchin, suggest that the stories that come from mythic records should be taken as reasonably factual accounts and not dismissed as a flight of fantasy. These ancient stories, instead of being the conjured up tales of a backward and primitive people, tell of the life and times of the gods on Earth. The theory goes on to state that the gods, including the God of the Bible, were not omnipotent beings, as is suggested by our current religious traditions, but were instead extraterrestrial beings. These extraterrestrials possessed weapons and technology that far exceeded our ancestor’s worldview.

Who were these extraterrestrials? They were, according to this line of thinking, the Gods of old. We know them as Zeus, Quazicoatal, Enki, Thor or FuXi. Ancient Alien theory goes on to propose that if you change the name God, Zeus, Enki, Thor, Quetzalcoatl, Pangu or FuXi to alien or extraterrestrial then the stories that have come down to us of their amazing lives, their incredible weapons and their flying crafts would all make sense. Thus, if a text states that the gods were directly responsible for the creation and education of humanity, then what the text is inferring is that we were created by an advanced race of beings that, according to these same texts, came from the stars.

This brings us to a very interesting and often overlooked point. Creationists claim that our world, and all life in it, was formed by God in one or several acts of creation. Ancient Alien theorists claim that the gods created us as well. The point of difference seems to be their interpretation of god. Creationists view God, as they find him literally described in the Bible, as a kind and omnipotent being that is outside of our realm of understanding. Ancient Alien theorists argue that the gods, including the God of the Bible, was an alien who interacted with humanity from its earliest times. Does that mean that Ancient Alien theorists are Creationists by default?

Regardless of the theory provided—Evolution, Creationism, or Ancient Alien—each has flaws. There is no hard tangible evidence to support Creationism. We have yet to find a spaceship, a ray gun, or a piece of advanced technology left behind by a group of extraterrestrials. Likewise, the elusive missing link has yet to be found. But, I believe, if you heed the hundreds of stories coming from cultures around the globe it seems clear that life on Earth was formed by a group of “gods” who came down to the Earth from the sky. Alien or not? You decide.


[While on this topic, one important school of thought that should not be neglected might be called ‘catastrophist.’ Though accepting the clear scientific evidence regarding natural history, the catastrophists see human evolution as a process punctuated many times by cataclysmic events—some as recently as in the last few thousand years—with a powerful and destructive impact on Earth’s history. Russian scientist Immanuel Velikovsky, the leading exponent of catastrophism, believed that mankind today lives in a state of amnesia resulting from a traumatic history, and still suffers from deep spiritual wounds blocking proper understanding of the past. From this perspective, mythologies are best seen as a kind of dream record of immense archetypal events that we still must struggle to fully comprehend. —ED]


© Copyright Rita Louise, Inc.,, 2017. All rights reserved. The author is the host of Just Energy Radio and author of ET Chronicles: What Myth & Legend Have To Say About Human Origin, and other books. Visit her website at or listen to

Alternative Science

May/June2017 – #123